guildwarsfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Slash command
Deletion I believe this page is, in fact, needed; prior to the redirect, searching for "slash command" (which was personally my first instinct on the topic) turned up 0 results. I'm going by the guidelines at wikipedia which say alternate names should be redirected. Correct me if I'm wrong or should be using something else for GuildWiki. As for being a double redirect; Commands is currently under discussion for a move to Command. So, the logic was to use the latter and temporarily have a double now as opposed to having one later. --66.92.33.187 17:41, 8 June 2006 (CDT) :Personally, I'm against the idea of having redirects just for the sake of having them; but if some terminology is commonly used, then I agree that keeping it as a redirect is reasonable. I'll leave the tag for now, to get some more feedback on how common this term is used over "command" or "commands", or an admin might remove it sooner if they disagree with the tag. :On the redirect; the move tag has been on that article since April with no talk on it showing in its discussion page. I just started a talk on it. To me, the current plural name is correct in that case, but we'll see if any further feedback comes of it. My opinion on the redirect is that I would recommend not intentionally creating double redirects even in anticipation of an eventual change, as the gets patrolled frequently by several people, myself included. If the Commands article is ever moved/renamed, then the redirects can just be fixed at that point. --- Barek (talk • ) - 17:58, 8 June 2006 (CDT) ::I see the article was deleted, any further comment on why? I can see the double redirect needing to be fixed, but a Google search for "slash commands" returns 1 million hits, so it is a pretty common term. --66.92.33.187 20:51, 8 June 2006 (CDT) :::The question that should be asked is "Is this used in reference to Guild Wars?" I have never heard it before, is it used in any of the manuals? The whole first page of of the Google search is mostly hits for this in reference to WoW. Also, We are not Wikipedia. --Rainith 20:56, 8 June 2006 (CDT) ::::While it may not be the most common usage among long-time players, new players coming from other online games are the most likely to need to find the command list. Also, refining the search to "guild wars" "slash commands" still returns several game review and fan sites using the term. In particular, the 3rd link atm is gwonline.net, which is currently the top listed elite fansite. I guess I'm just not seeing the downside to helping people who use a slightly different term find the page they're looking for? ::::As for not being wikipedia, my apologies. However, I cannot find a GuildWiki page on redirects, and We are not Wikipedia does state that most policies are the same; this did not seem like an exceptional case. Further, it would seem pretentious of me to port over a policy page to support my own argument. ::::In any case, thanks for your time. --66.92.33.187 21:40, 8 June 2006 (CDT) :::::I can see your point, and to some degree I can agree that the redirect might help players migrating from other games. That's probably the stronger argument towards keeping the redirect. Personally, it's enough to convince me; not sure about others. :::::On the other argument for keeping it, I can't find any evidence that it is a common term in Guild Wars. I had also done a search on Google for a similar set of terms. I saw the specific link you mentioned on gwonline.net; it's from Dec 2004 and was comments on a beta weekend event (pre-release of the first Guild Wars). I did eventually find a reference in a GW site's forum, but when I viewed the thread they were discussing a different game in the forum. After that, I poked around a couple fansites. Thier lists of the available commands label the pages as either "commands", "emotes", or "other commands". There's really not much if any use in the GW community of the term "slash command" from what I can see. --- Barek (talk • ) - 21:58, 8 June 2006 (CDT) ::::::Thanks for your support, Barek. Personally, the friends I play with have all have played GW since release, but we still use the term, so I know there at least a few, though it seems we're in the minority. --66.92.33.187 22:18, 8 June 2006 (CDT) I've recreated both Slash commands and Slash command with the proper redirects for now, if there are any objections let me know. --66.92.33.187 15:12, 9 June 2006 (CDT) I see a new delete tag now, with the reason that "it was recreated a day after deletion, June 8th." Once again, GuildWiki has no policy page for deletion or undeletion. So, I had assumed that, since the deletion took place almost instantaneously after the "discussion" began, 1 day was more than adequate to allow anyone to voice further counterarguments. Apparently not, so I will continue the reasoning for keeping this redirect. The problem here is, since there have in fact been no new comments on this talk page since June 8th, I'm not sure what more to say. As far as I can tell, the argument for deletion so far has been "I've never heard of it, one other guy hasn't heard of it, so it must not exist!" The only other unaddressed points being: *''"Not really much use in the GW community":'' *http://com5.runboard.com/bpheonixascension.fgeneral.t28 *http://www.whitemantle.net/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=1 *http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-1048.html *http://www.gamerseurope.com/articles/713 (Europe) *http://t-2038.cocolog-nifty.com/gws/2006/01/slash_command_l.html (Japan) *Also, many people type "/command" (which is more difficult to search for) but pronounce "slash command." *''"Is it in the manual?"'' - No, because they aren't listed in the manual. On the reference card, they are titled "emotes," and the non-emote commands are not listed. *''"The first page of hits is mostly in reference to WoW"'' - Because WoW is currently the most popular MMO in the world. Going through the pages and/or refining the search gives more specific results, see above. Again, it may not be the most common usage. But, to make an analogy; just because you've never heard of the word "kakistocracy," doesn't mean it shouldn't be in the dictionary. -- 66.92.33.187 13:41, 14 June 2006 (CDT) One mistake on my part; GuildWiki does in fact have policy pages on deletion (but not undeletion). And as it turns out, Rainith's deletion violated the guidelines in both Project:Don't immediately delete and Project:Criteria for deletion. -- 66.92.33.187 15:14, 14 June 2006 (CDT) :Like I said above, I honestly do not see this term as being common usage in the GW community, and we a a fansite for GW, not a dictionary or encyclopedia. Even after seeing the links you mentioned of sporadic usage, I don't see it as a common term. :That said, it is obviously a common term in use in other games, so players migrating from those to GW may be more familiar with it and a redirect is an easy way to point them to the GW equivalent term. --- Barek (talk • ) - 12:53, 15 June 2006 (CDT) ::*You concede that the article is useful, and at the same time place a delete tag on it? ::*Again, you seem to think that anything you don't use must not be common. ::*GuildWiki's usefulness comes from its reference material, just as a dictionary or encyclopedia. Looking at leaves no doubt of this. Having this redirect increases the usefulness of the wiki for people who use this term. Deleting it serves no purpose whatsoever. ::-- 66.92.33.187 15:32, 15 June 2006 (CDT) :::The delete tag was re-applied because the article was restored almost immediately after deletion. That act in itself forces a closer look by admins to sort out. If something is deleted, then almost immediately restored, it is not unreasonable to question the existence of the restored article. As I said in the delete tag itself: "While I can see a potential reason for keeping this, it was re-created the day after it was deleted by Rainith on June 8th after discussion on the talk page". Was the original deletion premature? Likely, I am not questioning that point. My comment that the term is not common is based on not hearing others use it (I have seen posts asking what command does something, never seen asked what 'slash command' does something), the comment is also from seeing minimal and sporadic use of it in any GW fan site. Also, articles on other GW fansites seem to label pages related to the codes as commands, not slash commands. As for GuildWiki being a source of reference material, that is not relevant here. By definition, this wiki does contain reference material, that is not in question. --- Barek (talk • ) - 16:09, 15 June 2006 (CDT) :::: I strongly favor keeping this. Redirects use up virtually no server resources (I was reading up on them on wikipedia recently) and rarely confuse, and often help. At the least, someone who searches for "slash" should find a page talking about "/dance". For that matter, someone searching for "/dance" should find it, too (which it mostly does well, yay). Players (especially new players who learn things by asking questions and are told "Type /dance") will often have very little information to go on other than what they do in the game. They won't know they are called emotes. --JoDiamonds 16:29, 15 June 2006 (CDT) I'm fine with keeping this one, it's just capitalisation and the more arcane misspellings I don't see the point of — Skuld 16:50, 15 June 2006 (CDT) :I don't really like this page. I don't see anyone typing "slash command" to find out what the commands are. People say "slash rank" but they type it "/rank." I highly doubt anyone will be using this. And anonymous perosn: Guildwiki is not a dictionary, therefore, the argument that it IS out there is some lame capacity does not help the article. The issue is usefulness. I don't see this as useful. --Karlos 17:01, 15 June 2006 (CDT) ::If a search for "slash command" returns nothing, then I have to agree that this page is needed. It is exactly what I would type if those were what I was looking for (I would not, for instance, simply type command because that is much too generic). -- Bishop rap| ] 17:10, 15 June 2006 (CDT) :::Added a line in Commands to say that they are sometimes also referred to as "slash commands". I'm not particularly fussed about this article although I probably lean towards its deletion now that searching for "slash commands" or "slash command" gives a page text match to Command. --Xasxas256 18:21, 15 June 2006 (CDT) ::*Yes, it is more frequently typed "/command" as I noted earlier, but you cannot search for that in the MediaWiki system. Thus, some people type "slash command" into the Go/Search box, for example both myself and Bishop and Dtremenak below. ::*I never said GuildWiki was a dictionary, I said it was like a dictionary, meaning it is the information (and the completeness and accessiblity of information) that makes it valuable. ::*Karlos, you may think the people using this term are a "lame" minority, but let me risk quoting Wikipedia's policy page on that: Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful — this is not because the other person is a liar, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways. ::*I will also reiterate what JoDiamonds said; redirects cost basically nothing in terms of server resources. (Though, apparently, the same cannot always be said of their talk pages.) Search queries are more expensive by far, not to mention more cumbersome for the user. ::-- 66.92.33.187 18:32, 15 June 2006 (CDT) :::Clarification: I did not call the people using the term a "lame minority." That rewrite of my words was uncalled for. I said the expression itself might exist in some lame (feeble) capacity (i,e, small minority). I welcome an aggressive debate any time, but I can't defend arguments I did not make. That said, I care very little about this. I feel the S&T category has spiraled completely out of hand at this point, same thing with the builds category. I seldom put up a fight in those categories. I just wanted to make a principle clear. Finally: WE ARE NOT BLEEPING WIKIPEDIA! :) --Karlos 19:08, 15 June 2006 (CDT) For what it's worth (i.e. not much), I also support keeping this page. "Slash command" is a common term to refer to commands beginning with a slash. When I first started looking for a list of them, that's what I searched for. Dtremenak 18:09, 15 June 2006 (CDT) :Project:You are valuable - no one here should feel that their opinion isn't worth much. --- Barek (talk • ) - 18:18, 15 June 2006 (CDT) ::Oh yeah? I'm going to disagree with you right here just to make this opinion of mine worthless. d-: -User:PanSola (talk to the ) 03:16, 16 June 2006 (CDT) I haven't read everything above. I don't see a problem with this page. Unnecessary redirects are pointless, but if someone is willing to argue that a redirect is helpful then I would keep it every time, whether I agree or not. There's no harm in keeping it and it might help someone out. <LordBiro>/<Talk> 07:03, 17 June 2006 (CDT) :What Lord Biro said. While I don't really see this page being useful (so I wouldn't have created it in the first place, or I might even have tagged it for deletion), the fact alone that this talk page is now 2 feet long and some people have spoken up in favor shows that there is at least some demand for the term. So, I don't mind keeping the article. After all, it's just a tiny little redirect. Nothing to get your hair in a fuzz about. -- 02:11, 19 June 2006 (CDT)